135
135
Oct 19, 2012
10/12
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 135
favorite 0
quote 0
and that if these cases, most importantly, griswold, is overturned at the same time roe is, then we could see birth control outlawed for single people, certainly for minors. and if some of these personhood laws pass in the states once roe is overturned, those would make birth control illegal also. where we're going to be is kind of a condoms only contraceptive policy in parts of this country. >> and do you think mitt romney can rehabilitate himself with women voters? i mean, trust is a big issue here. no question about it. but is it just a matter of time before the numbers swing big to the president? i mean, can mitt romney rehabilitate himself with women? i mean, if they start giving the kind of answers that women want to hear? >> if women get the message, which obama is sending now, absolutely not. women are smart. we're pragmatic. you know, we want our freedom preserved. we want our rights preserved. we believe in equality. we don't want these guys taking control of our lives, telling us what to do. >> i mean, isn't it the equal pay the most damaging of all? >> yeah, i mean, there's ab
and that if these cases, most importantly, griswold, is overturned at the same time roe is, then we could see birth control outlawed for single people, certainly for minors. and if some of these personhood laws pass in the states once roe is overturned, those would make birth control illegal also. where we're going to be is kind of a condoms only contraceptive policy in parts of this country. >> and do you think mitt romney can rehabilitate himself with women voters? i mean, trust is a...
856
856
Oct 4, 2012
10/12
by
WJLA
tv
eye 856
favorite 0
quote 0
the griswolds from the movie classic "vacation." they are reuniting. and they're doing it right here on "gma." >> that's going to be great. that's coming up. >>> let's get to the hollywood home invasion that may have been a high-stakes hoax. a s.w.a.t. team descending on ashton kutcher's mansion, storming his home after reports of shots fired. david wright has this story. >> reporter: the lapd is taking this very seriously. a manhunt under way for the people responsible. this is a new kind of prank called s.w.a.t.ing. spending a special weapons and tactics team to an unsuspecting doorstep. in this case, the doorstep belonged to hollywood's highest-paid actor on television, ashton kutcher. a massive police response, including a s.w.a.t. team, paramedics and a dozen l.a. police officers. gathering like heavily-armed paparazzi, outside the hollywood home of a star. >> officers at hollywood station received a message through the tdd, which claimed that people had broken into the home. and they heard at least three shots. >> reporter: the report came in on
the griswolds from the movie classic "vacation." they are reuniting. and they're doing it right here on "gma." >> that's going to be great. that's coming up. >>> let's get to the hollywood home invasion that may have been a high-stakes hoax. a s.w.a.t. team descending on ashton kutcher's mansion, storming his home after reports of shots fired. david wright has this story. >> reporter: the lapd is taking this very seriously. a manhunt under way for the...
183
183
Oct 10, 2012
10/12
by
CSPAN2
tv
eye 183
favorite 0
quote 0
so griswold sets a marker that down the court used, for example, to say the government can't regulate in addition to mary contraception. but beyond this idea is the idea that government cannot control all procreation. is there anything more and not meant to have the government how politicians control procreation? i know that many of us have heard about stories in china with one child will spirit you can only have one child and abortions when they find out the child is a female. so government regulation of ideas decide to do with their bodies in terms of procreation is a dangerous concept which the supreme court has recognized. we just came back from the legal analysis and about why did the supreme court did not? why did it decide that within the i.d. of the constitution the spread of liberty? and the reason is its core value, while we were founded, which is we want to protect rights to the extent we can. in a system of government and rolls its hard to do that, but we have to have limits. and the court decided that those limits existed in the area of procreation. those core values of l
so griswold sets a marker that down the court used, for example, to say the government can't regulate in addition to mary contraception. but beyond this idea is the idea that government cannot control all procreation. is there anything more and not meant to have the government how politicians control procreation? i know that many of us have heard about stories in china with one child will spirit you can only have one child and abortions when they find out the child is a female. so government...
98
98
Oct 26, 2012
10/12
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 98
favorite 0
quote 0
. >> do you believe in the right to privacy which was put forward with griswold vs. connecticut? >> this is an important question for people to know -- >> i accept the decision of griswald. >> i take that as a no. >> then you misunderstand it. >> do you support an amendment to the u.s. constitution, the person had amendment that was proposed in the state of mississippi and failed? >> i would look at the language of that, but generally speaking, if so inclined to be supportive of the finding -- defining life at the conception and the catholic church in the five basic positions of the church with embryonic stem cell research. i would want to see the language. >> if you years ago you showed a scale model of a wall that should be built on the southern border with mexico. do you still feel that this is the way to go? >> people said we cannot build a wall. i said, i would get down to the tinker toys and show them. i put together a model and said, this is how we do it. we could build a mile of this per day. this puts aside the argument, that we have 5,500 miles of the great wall of chin
. >> do you believe in the right to privacy which was put forward with griswold vs. connecticut? >> this is an important question for people to know -- >> i accept the decision of griswald. >> i take that as a no. >> then you misunderstand it. >> do you support an amendment to the u.s. constitution, the person had amendment that was proposed in the state of mississippi and failed? >> i would look at the language of that, but generally speaking, if so...
142
142
Oct 28, 2012
10/12
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 142
favorite 0
quote 0
. >> do you believe in the right to privacy which was put forward with griswold vs. connecticut? >> this is an important question for people to know -- >> i accept the decision of griswald. >> i take that as a no. >> then you misunderstand it. [laughter] >> do you support an amendment to the u.s. constitution, the person had amendment that was proposed in the state of mississippi and failed? >> i would look at the language of that, but generally speaking, if so inclined to be supportive of the finding -- defining life at the conception and the catholic church in the five basic positions of the church with embryonic stem cell research. i would want to see the language. >> if you years ago you showed a scale model of a wall that should be built on the southern border with mexico. do you still feel that this is the way to go? >> people said we cannot build a wall. i said, i would get down to the tinker toys and show them. i put together a model and said, this is how we do it. we could build a mile of this per day. this puts aside the argument, that we have 5,500 miles of the great w
. >> do you believe in the right to privacy which was put forward with griswold vs. connecticut? >> this is an important question for people to know -- >> i accept the decision of griswald. >> i take that as a no. >> then you misunderstand it. [laughter] >> do you support an amendment to the u.s. constitution, the person had amendment that was proposed in the state of mississippi and failed? >> i would look at the language of that, but generally...
79
79
Oct 2, 2012
10/12
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 79
favorite 0
quote 0
them for ye they were lingering on the books for years and finally, the supreme court in a case called griswold vs. connecticut said it was unconstitutional to prohibit married people from using contraception in the privacy of their own bedroom. does the constitution has a provision that says the government may not -- may prohibit the married couples from using contraception in the bedroom? it does not. it does have to process and the court found there was a right of privacy. for my libertarian friends in the crowd, it means something you happen saying for years -- the government to get out of our lives to the extent possible. we -- we don't cover and having anything to do with are buried sexuality. then, the government cannot regulate unmarried contraception. but beyond this idea is the idea that government cannot control our procreation. is there anything more anathema to a human being that to have government or politicians control procreation? i know many of us have heard about the story in china with one child rules. you can only have one child and abortion being used when they find out the
them for ye they were lingering on the books for years and finally, the supreme court in a case called griswold vs. connecticut said it was unconstitutional to prohibit married people from using contraception in the privacy of their own bedroom. does the constitution has a provision that says the government may not -- may prohibit the married couples from using contraception in the bedroom? it does not. it does have to process and the court found there was a right of privacy. for my libertarian...
114
114
Oct 9, 2012
10/12
by
CSPAN2
tv
eye 114
favorite 0
quote 0
so, griswold said a marker that then the court used for example to see the government can also regulate and additional contraception. but beyond this idea is the idea that the government cannot control the procreation. is their anything more than enough money to having the government, to have politicians control procreation? i know many of us have heard about the stories in china with one child rules, and abortion is being used in order when they finally the child as a female we decide what to do it our bodies in terms of procreation is a dangerous concept the supreme court has recognized. so we came back from the legal analysis for a while and think about why did the supreme court to that? why did it decide that within the idea that the constitution was destroyed and liberty and the reason was its core value why we were founded as a country which is the want to protect individual rights to the extent that we can. in the system of government and rules it's hard to do that but we have to have limits, and the court decided those limits existed in the area of procreation. those core values
so, griswold said a marker that then the court used for example to see the government can also regulate and additional contraception. but beyond this idea is the idea that the government cannot control the procreation. is their anything more than enough money to having the government, to have politicians control procreation? i know many of us have heard about the stories in china with one child rules, and abortion is being used in order when they finally the child as a female we decide what to...
172
172
Oct 18, 2012
10/12
by
CSPAN2
tv
eye 172
favorite 0
quote 1
it's a reference to a case called griswold versus connecticut which is a fundamental roe v. wade and the conservatives are nonliberal law. justice douglas wrote that opinion which is about a page and a half on the 14th and 15th amendment. i was not arguing the number argument. i do care about federal reserve and those kinds of things but at the things but at the end of the day i was making an argument about the meaning and why did madison -- to the most important people and today the ratification convention. we decided against the recollection for impracticality or really it's the issue of the communication issue. >> job they did decide against it. we don't deny that. they also decided against the governor's pic and legislators pick but with a decided was not what they put in the constitution constitution which was an unqualified grant of power to the states not subject to congressional veto like other election laws are. it's a unique state power and it's a plenary power and read macpherson in 1893 decision which is a seminole case and you will find all kinds of language tha
it's a reference to a case called griswold versus connecticut which is a fundamental roe v. wade and the conservatives are nonliberal law. justice douglas wrote that opinion which is about a page and a half on the 14th and 15th amendment. i was not arguing the number argument. i do care about federal reserve and those kinds of things but at the things but at the end of the day i was making an argument about the meaning and why did madison -- to the most important people and today the...
129
129
Oct 30, 2012
10/12
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 129
favorite 0
quote 0
. >> do you believe in the right to privacy which was put forward with griswold vs. connecticut? >> this is an important question for people to know -- >> i accept the decision of griswald. >> i take that as a no. >> then you misunderstand it. >> do you support an amendment to the u.s. constitution, the person had amendment that was proposed in the state of mississippi and failed? >> i would look at the language of that, but generally speaking, if so inclined to be supportive of the finding -- defining life at the conception and the catholic church in the five basic positions of the church with embryonic stem cell research. i would want to see the language. >> if you years ago you showed a scale model of a wall that should be built on the southern border with mexico. do you still feel that this is the way to go? >> people said we cannot build a wall. i said, i would get down to the tinker toys and show them. i put together a model and said, this is how we do it. we could build a mile of this per day. this puts aside the argument, that we have 5,500 miles of the great wall of chin
. >> do you believe in the right to privacy which was put forward with griswold vs. connecticut? >> this is an important question for people to know -- >> i accept the decision of griswald. >> i take that as a no. >> then you misunderstand it. >> do you support an amendment to the u.s. constitution, the person had amendment that was proposed in the state of mississippi and failed? >> i would look at the language of that, but generally speaking, if so...
99
99
Oct 8, 2012
10/12
by
CSPAN2
tv
eye 99
favorite 0
quote 0
douglas' opinion in griswold v. connecticut, shade married couples -- said that married counsel les could -- couples could not be denied the right to buy birth control. and perhaps more importantly, changing television dramas forever. [laughter] 1967, the -- perhaps the best-named case in supreme court history, loving v. virginia. what was the case of loving v. virginia about? it was the case that said states could no longer ban racial intermarriage. think about that, 1967. there are people in this room who were alive in 1967. [laughter] and it was still illegal in lot of states for racial intermarriage. you know, when barack obama's parents got married in kenya -- i'm sorry, in -- [laughter] it's such a cheap joke, and i apologize for that. but it does remind me that, you know, everybody knows mitt romney is having a rough, rough patch as presidential candidate -- [applause] but, all right, all right. yeah. but, you know, a sentence that i have not heard uttered anywhere is if only donald trump had been the nominee
douglas' opinion in griswold v. connecticut, shade married couples -- said that married counsel les could -- couples could not be denied the right to buy birth control. and perhaps more importantly, changing television dramas forever. [laughter] 1967, the -- perhaps the best-named case in supreme court history, loving v. virginia. what was the case of loving v. virginia about? it was the case that said states could no longer ban racial intermarriage. think about that, 1967. there are people in...